• rumschlumpel@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    Hunter-gatherers definitely had a lower quality of life in many material ways, but I’d assume that they were doing pretty well in terms of social and psychological wellbeing.

    • PugJesus@piefed.socialM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      I dunno that I’d take a stance either way. “Evolved for” is different from “thrives in”, after all. We also evolved for the physical health conditions of being pre-civilizational hunter-gatherers, but that doesn’t actually mean that our physical health is optimal in the conditions we evolved for.

    • Bubbaonthebeach@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Only if you were the same as everyone else. If you were an unwanted child, or one with deformities or anything else that could be a “bad omen” you would have been left to die. Same if you were too injured or sick to treat or past your useful lifespan.

      • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Sure. Lack of material goods and modern science is an issue. I certainly wouldn’t trade access to modern medicine with a healthy social life. But it’s a fact that tons of people in wealthy countries suffer from social isolation and stress from modern work life.